Document Type
Article
Publication Date
2-12-1991
Abstract
Plaintiff-appellant Fednav, Ltd. ("Fednav") appeals from a judgment entered in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York (Broderick, J.) dismissing its complaint against defendant-appellee Isoramar, S.A. ("Isoramar") for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The district court found that Isoramar's agreement to contribute to the settlement of a cargo claim was not a maritime contract permitting invocation of the court's admiralty jurisdiction.
On appeal, Fednav asserts that we must look to the subject matter of the original contract in deciding whether the Fednav-Isoramar contribution agreement is a maritime contract. Fednav argues that the settlement agreement of the cargo dispute is a maritime contract and disputes relating to that settlement are sufficiently connected to the underlying maritime action to fall within admiralty jurisdiction. However, Isoramar never was a party to the admiralty action involving the cargo dispute or to its settlement. Because the contribution agreement is a contract separate and distinct from the cargo settlement agreement, which neither involves maritime services nor maritime transactions, and because contribution was not sought in the admiralty action, we find that the district court properly dismissed the action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court.
Recommended Citation
Miner '56, Roger J., "Fednav, Ltd. v. ISORAMAR, SA, 925 F. 2d 599 - Court of Appeals, 2nd Circuit 1991" (1991). Circuit Court Opinions. 304.
https://digitalcommons.nyls.edu/circuit_opinions/304
Comments
925 F.2d 599 (1991)
FEDNAV, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
ISORAMAR, S.A., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 561, Docket 90-7592.
United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.
Argued November 15, 1990. Decided February 12, 1991.
New York Law School location: File #1104, Box #127